posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 10:07 PM
Originally posted by pierregustavetoutant
The right to life supercedes the right to not be inconvenienced.
The desire not to be inconvenienced does not give the right to commit murder against an innocent.
Pretty weak argument.
Being sentenced to 18 years of hard labor for the child and the parent for poor judgment seems excessive to me.
I hardly think the 18 year obligation, financial, emotional or otherwise counts as simply an "inconvenience" for the parent...
It’s not just best for the woman either - what kind of life do unwanted children lead? Usually, in poverty likely in trouble with the law and in
most instances repeating the cycle with a new generation of their own. Imagine growing up with a parent who resents you as a burden...
A parent who will say - you ruined my life...is a #ty one we can all agree…
However the fact remains - they didn’t want to be one. If the government makes them have a child they don’t want what kind of life do you see for
Ever met someone who grew up that way? I have - guilt ridden, maladjusted and in trouble with the law from a young age, chip on shoulder , angry,
whatever you want to call it - you name it…all that and more are the neato things they develop. Unhappy!
Outstanding, I bet that's a sweet way to live. Talk about years of therapy in the making. Who will pay for all that maladjustment...
We will, that's who...all to protect the innocent who more likely than not will grow up resented by their parent(s) and a burden to the taxpayer.
Unplanned and unwanted children invariably grow up feed at the public troth in some way.
It is more humane to end that life before it begins than to sentence them a crappy life of poverty and rejection from the one person who is supposed
to love them unconditionally.